12 August 2014

The Federal Bureau of Investigation will investigate the fatal shooting by police of 18-year-old Michael Brown in suburban St. Louis, according to a statement by Attorney General Eric Holder released by the Justice Department.

Meanwhile: The St. Louis metropolitan region has been rocked by three days of protests after the unarmed, Black teenager was killed by a Ferguson police officer on Saturday, August 9. "Officials have so far declined to identify the police officer who shot Mr. Brown or disclose his race. The officer was put on administrative leave," reports The New York Times.

On Monday night, police officers using tear gas and rubber bullets tried to disperse the crowd of mostly African-Americans, who had been gathering through the day under the hot sun. The protesters questioned the role that race — and simmering tensions between residents and the Police Department — may have played in the killing of Michael Brown, 18, who was to start college this week.

The standoff lasted for more than an hour, with about a dozen men approaching officers with their hands up saying, “Don’t shoot me.” At least 100 police officers were on the scene, shining bright lights into the crowd and telling people to return to their homes.

The population of Ferguson has changed dramatically ... but the suburb's power structure has not.

Ferguson, a city of 21,000 northwest of St. Louis, has shifted substantially over the last decade, with blacks, once a minority, now making up two-thirds of the residents, after many white families moved out to surrounding suburbs. The town’s leadership and the police have remained predominantly white. In 2013, the suspension of a black superintendent of schools by an all-white school board stirred protests. And the Justice Department has a continuing investigation into racial disparities in legal representation for juveniles in Family Court.

The police maintain the unarmed teenager struck a police officer and tried to grab the officer's gun. Numerous witnesses have disputed the official account and describe an execution, reports ColorLines.

Dorian Johnson was walking down the middle of the street in Ferguson, Missouri, with his friend Michael Brown on Saturday—just moments before Brown was shot and killed by a still unnamed police officer. Johnson says that police officer began cursing at them and emerged from the car with his weapon drawn. He says he remembers no fewer than seven shots fired. He recalls that Brown’s hands were in the air as the officer fired.

Johnson has told several media outlets that Brown did not strike the officer. Johnson says the officer grabbed Brown by the throat and then unloaded his weapon.

A second eyewitness also disputes the official claim. "The witness 'did not see Michael Brown struggling with the police officer inside his car at any point,' [said St. Louis NAACP President Adolphus Pruitt]. "They did witness the incident from the time it started from the time of the initial stop by the police car," reports the St. Louis Post Dispatch. The FBI will soon interview this new witness, according to reports.

04 February 2014

Attorney General Eric Holder delivered a major speech on LGBT rights to the parliament of Sweden—the Riksdag—today in Stockholm. The Attorney General described LGBT rights as one of the "civil rights challenges of our time"and called for an international movement to fight anti-LGBT discrimination.

Holder's remarks are only days before the opening of the Sochi 2014 Olympics. Russia's poor record on human and LGBT rights are likely to continue to dominate news coverage. Video has not yet been uploaded of Holder's speech but two highlights from the transcript:

Just as our forebears came together to overcome tremendous adversity – and to forge the more just and more equal societies in which we now live – so, too, must the current generation rise to the causes that have become the struggles of our day; the defining civil rights challenges of our time. I believe one of these struggles is the fight for equality for our lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender – or LGBT – citizens.

Holder also referenced the Supreme Court's historic decision on June 26, 2013 to strike down Section Three of the Defense of Marriage Act in United States v. Windsor. Section Three banned federal recognition of legally married same-sex couples and denies more than 1,000 benefits, such as Social Security, pension benefits and preferential tax treatment.

This marked a major victory for the cause of equal protection under U.S. law, and a significant step forward for committed and loving couples throughout the country. Today, these couples and their families are one step closer to the equal treatment, and the full recognition, to which they, their loved ones, and their children are entitled.

The speech was "perhaps the strongest statement of his career at the Justice Department in favor of expanding LGBT rights," noted the Washington Post.

The Attorney General also highlighted the Obama Administration's other accomplishments on LGBT issues, such as pushing for the end of "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" and protections for LGBT domestic violence victims that were added to the Violence Against Women Act.

Holder also discussed other human rights challenges such as terrorism, human trafficking and gender inequality, economic justice and racial discrimination.

Holder announced on January 10 that the Obama Administration will recognize the 1300 plus same-sex marriages that were performed in Utah—-despite that state's decision not to recognize those marriages pending a decision in the federal court system.

Sweden is generally regarded as one of the global leaders in human rights. It was the first nation to mandate a parental leave act and one of the first to ban discrimination nationwide against its LGBT citizens. Sweden became the seventh nation to mandate equal marriage in 2009 by an overwhelming vote. At least fourteen nations mandate equal marriage today—Argentina, Belgium, Brazil, Canada, Denmark,France, Iceland, Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Portugal, Spain, South Africa, Sweden and Uruguay. Some jurisdictions in Brazil, Mexico and the USA also allow same-sex marriage. Legislation has been approved to mandate equal marriage in England, Wales and Scotland later this year.

10 January 2014

Excellent. Attorney General Eric Holder announced today that the Obama Administration will recognize the 1300 plus same-sex marriages that were performed in Utah ... despite that state's decision not to recognize those marriages pending a decision in the federal court system.

The Federal Bureau of Investigation has announced that it is "monitoring" the case—but "has not indicated that it has opened its own investigation," reports the Associated Press. This after a request by Rep. Bennie Thompson who was responding to family members who McMillian's death investigated as a hate crime. "Thompson, whose daughter attended college with McMillian, said he had known the victim for years," added the AP.

"The FBI is aware of the case, has been monitoring the state investigation, and will assess evidence to determine whether federal prosecution is appropriate," FBI spokeswoman Deborah Madden said Wednesday in a statement. She said the FBI has been following the investigation since March 1, shortly after learning of the circumstances surrounding McMillian's death.

The FBI could determine whether to file a federal hate crime charge, which covers acts motivated by bias against sexual orientation. Mississippi's state law against hate crimes covers acts motivated by race, but not sexual orientation. The Coahoma County Sheriff's Office has been the lead agency in the investigation with assistance from the MBI, said Mississippi Department Public of Safety spokesman Warren Strain.

The
accounts are based on photographs the family saw, as well as two
conversations the family says it had with the coroner.Coahoma
County Coroner Scotty Meredith said only that McMillian wasn’t dragged
behind a vehicle but rather his body was dragged from the vehicle to the
spot where it was dumped.

Lawrence
Reed made his first court appearance this week in Memphis, Tennessee.
The suspect will be extradited to neighboring Mississippi, reports Memphis WMC-5 and Biloxi WLOX 24.

Lawrence
Reed told Shelby County Judge Louis Montesi he was not going to
challenge his extradition back to Coahoma County, Mississippi where he
faces murder charges. Reed told the judge that he did not have an
attorney. He will now go back to Coahoma County to face murder
charges. Coahoma County authorities have not told Action News 5 exactly
when
Lawrence Reed will be taken back to Mississippi to face those murder
charges.

Civil rights groups are outraged that Reed could claim a "gay panic" defense. National Black Justice Coalition Executive Director Sharon Lettman-Hicks described it as "irresponsible" in a letter to Attorney General Eric H. Holder.

NBJC feels the perpetuation and validation of the “gay panic”defense is irresponsible. The conflicting reports as well as the current racial and anti-LGBT climate in Mississippi is justification enough for a federal investigation.

Just last month, when an openly gay couple, Dr. Ravi Perry and Prince Paris, were invited to speak at aMississippi Historically Black College and University, local pastors rallied and protested the lecture. The publicoutcry resulted in the institution scaling down the visibility of the event and distancing itself.

The reality is, Marco's sexuality could have everything to do with
his murder. Rumors abound now that Marco allegedly 'hit on' his alleged
killer. The speculation goes that the reaction -- resulting in Marco's
strangulation and murder -- is being labeled a crime of "passion."
It's been framed in local media reports as a "personal" crime, according
to police. The framing of his murder as "personal" and a crime of "passion" is
an affront to all who have labored for civil rights since the beginning
of time.

Recent data show that anti-gay and racist crimes have soared
in Mississippi but two-thirds of its counties have "failed" to
file any reports with the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Justice
Department, according to November 2011 FBI report detailed at Rod 2.0. "Local activists expressed concerns that the numbers may be twice as high
than what is officially on record due to underreporting and fear of retaliation," adds the NBJC.

20 February 2012

This excellent news may have been buried over the weekend. Attorney General Eric Holder has notified congressional leadership that the Justice Department will no longer defend laws that prevent gay and lesbian couples from receiving the same military and veterans benefits afforded to their heterosexual counterparts, reported Talking Points Memo.

The Defense of Marriage Act and other laws ban federal recognition of same-sex marriage. The Obama Administration announced last February that it will NOT defend recent lawsuits challenging DOMA.

"The legislative record of these provisions contains no rationale for providing veterans’ benefits to opposite-sex couples of veterans but not to legally married same-sex spouses of veterans,” Holder wrote. “Neither the Department of Defense nor the Department of Veterans Affairs identified any justifications for that distinction that would warrant treating these provisions differently from Section 3 of DOMA."

Holder said DOJ would no longer defend the provisions in Title 38 which prevent same-sex couples who are legally married from obtaining benefits. He said that Congress would be provided a “full and fair opportunity” to defend the statues in the McLaughlin v. Panetta case if they wished to do so.

As Holder writes, the benefits in question "include medical and dental benefits, basic housing allowances, travel and transportation allowances, family separation benefits, military identification cards, visitation rights in military hospitals, survivor benefits, and the right to be buried together in military cemeteries."

The action taken by Attorney General Holder comes after the Servicemembers Legal Defense Network's lawsuit in McLaughlin v. Panetta. The lawsuit announced in October was the second federal lawsuit in as many weeks that targeted the military over DOMA. Only the week before, an 18-year lesbian Navy veteran announced a lawsuit over disability benefits. The decision could also impact more recent litigation, reports the Washington Blade.

Holder’s decision is likely to have a bearing on another lawsuit challenging Title 38 and DOMA, Cooper Harris v. United States. The lawsuit was filed by the Southern Poverty Law Center earlier this month on behalf of Tracey Cooper-Harris, an Iraq and Afghanistan veteran who’s seeking disability benefits for her spouse.

Christine Sun, SPLC’s deputy legal director, said she believes the Holder letter applies to her organization’s lawsuit in addition to the SLDN litigation.

"There’s absolutely no reason why it wouldn’t apply to our case," Sun said. "I believe that it was sent in connection to the McLaughlin case because there was the recent stipulation between SLDN and DOJ to extend the deadline for the government to respond to SLDN’s summary judgment case, but we’re certainly interpreting the letter to say that the Department of Justice won’t be defending Title 38 in our case either."

The Obama Administration will no longer defend these cases ... but it's very likely that counsel hired by House Speaker John Boehner (R-OH) will intervene to defend the litigation.

06 January 2012

The Justice Department announced that it is finally expanding its almost 90-year definition of rape to include attacks against men and transgender women. Any nonconsensual penetration, no matter the gender of the attacker or victim, will now constitute rape.

"Rape" will now be defined as "penetration, no matter how slight, of the vagina or anus with any body part or object, or oral penetration by a sex organ of another person, without the consent of the victim," according to a release from the White House and the DOJ.

Attorney General Eric Holder announced the changes today to the Uniform Crime Report’s definition of rape. The Justice Department said better reflect state criminal codes and updated definitions of sexual penetration. The new definition will lead to a more comprehensive nationwide statistical reporting, says the AG.

"These long overdue updates to the definition of rape will help ensure justice for those whose lives have been devastated by sexual violence and reflect the Department of Justice's commitment to standing with rape victims," said Holder. "This new, more inclusive definition will provide us with a more accurate understanding of the scope and volume of these crimes."

An FBI advisory panel recently recommended revisions to the historic definition, which was established in 1927. That law defined rape as "the carnal knowledge of a female, forcibly and against her will." This meant that "rape" only happened when a man forcibly penetrated a woman through her vagina.

23 February 2011

Via a spokesperson, House Speaker John Boehner responds to the Attorney General Eric Holder's announcement that the Administration will not defend DOMA in court.

"While Americans want Washington to focus on creating jobs and cutting spending, the President will have to explain why he thinks now is the appropriate time to stir up a controversial issue that sharply divides the nation."

And the Republican House bills to eliminate Planned Parenthood funding and redefine "rape" have created thousands of jobs?

In a major legal policy shift, the Obama Administration has announced it will NOT defend recent lawsuits challenging the Section Three of the Defense of Marriage Act which prohibits federal recognition of same-sex couples and denies all federal benefits, such as Social Security and health care.

The Department of Justice has determined that DOMA Section 3 is unconstitutional, Attorney General Eric Holder said in a letter to Congress. "Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (“DOMA”), 1 U.S.C. § 7, as applied to same-sex couples who are legally married under state law, violates the equal protection component of the Fifth Amendment."

Holder adds that law mandating discrimination based on "sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard."

The Attorney General concludes: "The President has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases. I fully concur with the President’s determination."

Holder' memorandum notes that the Administration is not ending its enforcement of DOMA—only its defense in court. Congress must repeal the statute or a court must find it unconstitutional in one of several pending cases.

The Attorney General made the following statement today about the Department’s course of action in two lawsuits, Pedersen v. OPM and Windsor v. United States, challenging Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), which defines marriage for federal purposes as only between a man and a woman:

In the two years since this Administration took office, the Department of Justice has defended Section 3 of the Defense of Marriage Act on several occasions in federal court. Each of those cases evaluating Section 3 was considered in jurisdictions in which binding circuit court precedents hold that laws singling out people based on sexual orientation, as DOMA does, are constitutional if there is a rational basis for their enactment. While the President opposes DOMA and believes it should be repealed, the Department has defended it in court because we were able to advance reasonable arguments under that rational basis standard.

Section 3 of DOMA has now been challenged in the Second Circuit, however, which has no established or binding standard for how laws concerning sexual orientation should be treated. In these cases, the Administration faces for the first time the question of whether laws regarding sexual orientation are subject to the more permissive standard of review or whether a more rigorous standard, under which laws targeting minority groups with a history of discrimination are viewed with suspicion by the courts, should apply.

After careful consideration, including a review of my recommendation, the President has concluded that given a number of factors, including a documented history of discrimination, classifications based on sexual orientation should be subject to a more heightened standard of scrutiny. The President has also concluded that Section 3 of DOMA, as applied to legally married same-sex couples, fails to meet that standard and is therefore unconstitutional. Given that conclusion, the President has instructed the Department not to defend the statute in such cases. I fully concur with the President’s determination.

Consequently, the Department will not defend the constitutionality of Section 3 of DOMA as applied to same-sex married couples in the two cases filed in the Second Circuit. We will, however, remain parties to the cases and continue to represent the interests of the United States throughout the litigation. I have informed Members of Congress of this decision, so Members who wish to defend the statute may pursue that option. The Department will also work closely with the courts to ensure that Congress has a full and fair opportunity to participate in pending litigation.

Furthermore, pursuant to the President’s instructions, and upon further notification to Congress, I will instruct Department attorneys to advise courts in other pending DOMA litigation of the President's and my conclusions that a heightened standard should apply, that Section 3 is unconstitutional under that standard and that the Department will cease defense of Section 3.

The Department has a longstanding practice of defending the constitutionality of duly-enacted statutes if reasonable arguments can be made in their defense. At the same time, the Department in the past has declined to defend statutes despite the availability of professionally responsible arguments, in part because – as here – the Department does not consider every such argument to be a “reasonable” one. Moreover, the Department has declined to defend a statute in cases, like this one, where the President has concluded that the statute is unconstitutional.

Much of the legal landscape has changed in the 15 years since Congress passed DOMA. The Supreme Court has ruled that laws criminalizing homosexual conduct are unconstitutional. Congress has repealed the military’s Don’t Ask, Don’t Tell policy. Several lower courts have ruled DOMA itself to be unconstitutional. Section 3 of DOMA will continue to remain in effect unless Congress repeals it or there is a final judicial finding that strikes it down, and the President has informed me that the Executive Branch will continue to enforce the law. But while both the wisdom and the legality of Section 3 of DOMA will continue to be the subject of both extensive litigation and public debate, this Administration will no longer assert its constitutionality in court.

This is an incredibly important development. It will impact same-sex marriage laws and discrimination statutes across the country. More to follow ...

03 September 2010

The Justice Department filed suit against Arizona's Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio, for refusing access and records for an investigation into allegations of widespread racial profiling and civil rights abuses. The federal suit filed in U.S. District Court in Phoenix says Arpaio and his office have "refused for 17 months to cooperate" with the federal government.

"Justice Department officials could not point to a case within the past 30 years in which they had to sue a law-enforcement department to provide access to information," reports AZCentral.com. "At
stake is $113 million in future federal funding for the county, they
say, which is given on the condition that officials agree they will not
discriminate against residents and will cooperate with federal
officials."

The FBI has launched a separate investigation into whether Arpaio has been "using his position to settle political vendettas."

20 August 2010

More developments in the death investigation of Mitrice Richardson, the now-25-year-old lesbian Los Angeles woman who disappeared ten
months ago and whose skeletal remains were discovered last week. In September 2009, the former beauty queen was arrested for not paying her $89 tab at a Malibu-area restaurant and vanished after she was released from a Malibu sheriff's station without car, purse or car.

Richardson was dining alone on Sept. 16 in Malibu at Geoffrey's
Restaurant on Pacific Coast Highway. Restaurant management contacted
Lost Hills after she could not pay her $89 bill and she exhibited signs
of acting strange, restaurant owner Jeff Peterson said. Sheriff's deputies who arrived on the scene conducted field
sobriety test but found that she was sober. It has since been revealed that
Richardson suffered from bipolar disorder, and at the time might have
been exhibiting signs of this illness. Peterson signed a citizen's
arrest form, and Richardson was taken into custody for possession of
marijuana in her car and defrauding an innkeeper.

The independent review stated, “Once Ms. Richardson, a misdemeanor
arrestee, cleared a check of criminal history and station personnel
determined that she was not a present danger to herself or others, or
gravely disabled, Malibu/Lost Hills Station personnel could no longer
legally detain her involuntarily.” During [last week's] press conference,
[Sheriff Lee] Baca said the "soul searching" will involve determining whether it is
appropriate to have somebody arrested under the circumstances of
Richardson's arrest. Peterson said he was bothered Baca did not tell the
full story. "He left out the whole part of why we did it [call
deputies], and that was because of her state of mind,” Peterson said. "If we wouldn't have arrested her, she would have gotten in her car and gotten away. Who knows what could have happened. Our issue was to get her to safety."

Peterson confirms Richardson's grandmother offered to pay the bill by credit card over the phone, but he refused for liability issues. The restaurant owner adds that he can "only think of one occasion in the past four years" when an arrest was made under similar circumstances.